3 ms·
The "participatory economy" seems like a gross gamification of online social interaction. It's important that people have aspects of there lives that aren't dri
by Orou 6y ago
The "participatory economy" seems like a gross gamification of online social interaction. It's important that people have aspects of there lives that aren't driven by financial incentives. I would argue that online communities, especially more niche, subscription-based ones, are driven and should be driven primarily by interest. Why do participants need to be "compensated" for their engagement?
> What if instead the community took a portion of the fee stream and distributed it to the members who most positively impacted the community?
I think it's arrogant to think we can develop a reward system that can both accurately match reward to real-world impact (how do you even quantify that?) and also avoid the trap of influencing users' behavior toward optimizing their virtual rewards (participatory income?) over engaging with their community authentically.
Subscription-based online platforms like Twitch and Patreon already work, what is the great improvement that a "participatory economy" brings?
- dredds 6y agoRating systems can be gamed, but micro-rewards and reward-limiters could subdue this effect if tied to some proof-of-individual system which also enhances the community. IRL; standup comedians get rewards, and patrons add to the entertainment thru feedback and therefore enhance the event. But to your main point; Are creators/contributors more authentic when struggling to survive, or more authentic when their time/reward matches their basic needs? Are we motivated by rewards, or does lack thereof restrict our production? It depends on individual circumstance or character, or some raw potential of the network effect which has few winners if poorly designed.